“…Three out of 10 studies were identified as good quality, while seven were of fair quality, as shown in Table S2 . Studies were primarily downgraded for unclear patient's demographic description [ 27 ], incomplete patient's history presentation [ 24 , 25 , [27] , [28] , [29] , [30] , [31] , [32] ], inadequate diagnostic test results description [ 28 , 30 ], unclear treatment description [ 25 , 27 , 28 , 32 ], incomplete post-intervention condition description [ [23] , [24] , [25] , 29 ], no proper adverse events identification [ [23] , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] , [30] , [31] , [32] ] and not enough takeaway lessons [ 23 ]. The most common cause for downgrading studies was no proper adverse events (harms) or unanticipated events being identified and described, which raised concerns if the treatment/intervention/drugs used has more benefit than risks and the if the benefits outweigh the risks.…”